Quite severe GAS has kicked in in a lot of us, including in yours truly... 😜. I could use this lens for outdoor portrait sessions. I have been using 2 cameras and 2, sometimes 3 different prime lenses for that purpose. I could get away with just a single setup, taking advantage of the zoom flexibility using this lens. But sometimes, I enjoy using the GM 50mm at f/1.2 or f/1.4 and that zoom lens simply can't pull that off. Hence, I am not ready to pull the trigger... but in a couple of months, maybe, just maybe, I may change my mind.
Peire wrote:
After testing the GM 50-150/2 yesterday I realized it is not for me.While very well built and having very good/excellent optics it is too (front)heavy,too bulky and has too small RR at each focal lenght for my needs.Fast,small primes/zooms will serve me better.
Small primes are Samyang 45mm f1.8, 75mm f1.8. & 100mm t2.3 cine lens. I like 100mm t2.3 due to 70mm mfd & 272g weight. I am sure 50-150mm beats the Samyang 100mm wide open but then it doesn't matter for personal use:
Small primes are Samyang 45mm f1.8, 75mm f1.8. & 100mm t2.3 cine lens. I like 100mm t2.3 due to 70mm mfd & 272g weight. I am sure 50-150mm beats the Samyang 100mm wide open but then it doesn't matter for personal use:
aCuria wrote:
Do fast small zooms exist in this range?
105/1.4, 135/1.8, 85/1.4 are not small
There’s the 90/2.8 but that’s not fast
Large or small is personal to the great extent.All I'm saying GM 50-150/2.8 does not fit my particular needs.I knew that almost from the beginning,yet gave it a chance,thinking especially of flower close ups.Sadly it did not live up to my expectations there.I felt sorry somehow about that as it is a remarkable lens in general.
What surprised me most is that the Sigma 105 1.4 (a beast somehow) is considerably smaller. But then again, I am sure that the 50-150 is a dream of a lens, especially for portrait work.
All modern lenses can take excellent photos of cats. The real strength of this lens is (I would think), its versatility and low light advantages. Image threads of cats and flowers don’t really show that. On paper a great lens I’m sure but for events or weddings, you still need a second camera with a wider angle on it. 150 isn’t long enough for most sports and it’s pretty chunky for portrait sessions (when the primes are sooo much lighter!)
It’s a shiny new toy though👍
zeitlos wrote:
What surprised me most is that the Sigma 105 1.4 (a beast somehow) is considerably smaller. But then again, I am sure that the 50-150 is a dream of a lens, especially for portrait work.
KarmaKramer wrote:
All modern lenses can take excellent photos of cats. The real strength of this lens is (I would think), its versatility and low light advantages. Image threads of cats and flowers don’t really show that. On paper a great lens I’m sure but for events or weddings, you still need a second camera with a wider angle on it. 150 isn’t long enough for most sports and it’s pretty chunky for portrait sessions (when the primes are sooo much lighter!)
It’s a shiny new toy though👍
I think it's a mistake to only think of fast lenses as having an advantage in low light. I've always been a fan of fast lenses even in bright light for their ability to create depth and subject isolation via shallow DOF--something the waterlily shots I posted demonstrate perfectly.
As for sports, I haven't shot any in years, but for indoor sports like courtside basketball, 150mm is more than enough especially on the higher megapixel bodies where you can crop if really needed. Portrait sessions, sure a prime is likely a better choice as you have all of the time in world to frame a shot and move around--but a zoom has utility in other situations.
Not everyone has use cases for every lens; just because its not something you see yourself using doesn't mean others won't, so you don't have to make any subtly derogatory remarks like "its a shiny new toy though." This is a pro lens and Sony clearly has a pro target market for it who won't view it as a toy.
AGeoJO wrote:
Yes to more DOF in corresponding focal length at approximately 105mm but better bokeh? I don't think so. However, if you zoom the lens close to the long end of the lens, the bokeh will become smoother.
For a number of years, the Sigma 105mm f1.4 has been my absolute favorite portrait lens. I've had three copies - one in Canon mount and two in Sony FE mount. For me, the big Achille's Heal of this lens is the severe loss of contrast (and flare) when pointing to light sources like the sun (which I like to do). It also suffers from some astigmatism, but of course, we tend to label that as 'character'.
I've only had the GM 50-150mm f2 for a couple of days, but I am incredibly impressed with its performance. It is absolutely killer-sharp over 100mm (outstanding sharpness under 100mm) and has some of the best contrast I have seen. Happily, the contrast seems to hold-up relatively well when pointing to light sources. Also, the bokeh seems to be really smooth and creamy. I have not noticed any problems with " transition zone" bokeh that Dustin Abbott points out.
I purchased this lens with some trepidation, since I already have so many lenses in this range, but I'm now quite pleased that I did so. I have a portrait shoot coming up and I plan to either pair it with the Sony GM 28-70mm f2 (another great lens) or my new Viltrox 35mm f1.2.
I have a love/hate relationship with these skins. I love not having a huge white lens, and the protection it provides. I hate putting them on I bought this on AliExpress... and it was nearly double what I paid the last time I bought a skin there. TARIFFS!!
InFocus2014 wrote:
For a number of years, the Sigma 105mm f1.4 has been my absolute favorite portrait lens. I've had three copies - one in Canon mount and two in Sony FE mount. For me, the big Achille's Heal of this lens is the severe loss of contrast (and flare) when pointing to light sources like the sun (which I like to do). It also suffers from some astigmatism, but of course, we tend to label that as 'character'.
I've only had the GM 50-150mm f2 for a couple of days, but I am incredibly impressed with its performance. It is absolutely killer-sharp over 100mm (outstanding sharpness under 100mm) and has some of the best contrast I have seen. Happily, the contrast seems to hold-up relatively well when pointing to light sources. Also, the bokeh seems to be really smooth and creamy. I have not noticed any problems with " transition zone" bokeh that Dustin Abbott points out.
I purchased this lens with some trepidation, since I already have so many lenses in this range, but I'm now quite pleased that I did so. I have a portrait shoot coming up and I plan to either pair it with the Sony GM 28-70mm f2 (another great lens) or my new Viltrox 35mm f1.2....Show more →
Donzo98 wrote:
I have a love/hate relationship with these skins. I love not having a huge white lens, and the protection it provides. I hate putting them on I bought this on AliExpress... and it was nearly double what I paid the last time I bought a skin there. TARIFFS!!
I think we all dislike installing these skins. . I have also installed plain black skins on my camera bodies (you cannot tell a skin was installed without a magnifying glass). Several years ago, I was at a shoot with two A1's - one in a side holster. With my mind on the shoot, I neglected to lock the holster. The camera fell toward the ground bouncing off my foot and skidding across the rough asphalt. It looked like a horrible mess, but when I peeled the Alphagvrd skin off, the camera was perfect. The skin saved me from an expensive repair. I now don't leave home without them.
I also really dislike white lenses (my Nikon long lenses were black, so I don't completely buy the heat argument), but didn't want to have white seams showing on a dark skin, so I ordered an Alphagvrd Arctic White skin for my 50-150mm (same as on my GM 70-200mm f2.8 II shown, below.
InFocus2014 wrote:
I think we all dislike installing these skins. . I have also installed plain black skins on my camera bodies (you cannot tell a skin was installed without a magnifying glass). Several years ago, I was at a shoot with two A1's - one in a side holster. With my mind on the shoot, I neglected to lock the holster. The camera fell toward the ground bouncing off my foot and skidding across the rough asphalt. It looked like a horrible mess, but when I peeled the Alphagvrd skin off, the camera was perfect. The skin saved me from an expensive repair. I now don't leave home without them.
I also really dislike white lenses (my Nikon long lenses were black, so I don't completely buy the heat argument), but didn't want to have white seams showing on a dark skin, so I ordered an Alphagvrd Arctic White skin for my 50-150mm (same as on my GM 70-200mm f2.8 II shown, below. ...Show more →
Donzo98 wrote:
I have a love/hate relationship with these skins. I love not having a huge white lens, and the protection it provides. I hate putting them on I bought this on AliExpress... and it was nearly double what I paid the last time I bought a skin there. TARIFFS!!
I agree with you on the love/hate relationship. It has saved me a few times from getting scuffs, but I've decided to no longer apply these because:
1) It's not worth my time
2) They've gotten more expensive, as you stated
3) They don't look better than OEM (though, I see your point about having a big white lens).
4) They feel much worse than OEM
5) While it may save me some $$$ in resale, I'll live with the consequences
That said, I still have it applied to my A9iii, 300 GM and 85 GM II. It takes about half as long to remove them vs. applying them, so I go back to #1 above
I do have the black skin on my A9iii that is as close to OEM look as possible, but you can still tell and definitely feel the difference.
Here are a few recent shots. Like some others have said I do not have the concerns about rendering that some of the YouTube reviewers mentioned. Generally, I really like it. There is sometimes some texture in the transition zone but not more than other lenses I have in this range. There are a few tricky shots below so you can judge for yourself. There's even a bit of swirl at 150mm and f/2 at some distances which I like.
...
